Allahabad High Court
Vijendra Singh @ Brajendra Singh @ ... vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 13 April, 2023
Bench: Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 15
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3566 of 2023
Applicant :- Vijendra Singh @ Brajendra Singh @ Guddu Singh @ Guddu
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Shailesh Kumar Singh,Shobh Nath Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.
Heard Sri Aditya Singh Tomar, Advocate holding brief of Sri Shailesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The instant application has been filed by the present applicant for quashing the bailable warrant dated 19.07.2022 as well as entire criminal proceeding of Case No.2312/2021, State vs. Vijendra Singh @ Brajendra @ Guddu, arising out of F.I.R. No.382/2012, under Sections 419 & 420 I.P.C., Police Station Mituli, District Lakhimpur Kheri.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that accused/ applicant is innocent, who has been falsely implicated in this case due to some ulterior reason.
His further submission is that the content of the first information report does not disclose any ingredients, which are essential to constitute offence under Sections 419 & 420 I.P.C. He has also submitted that even during investigation, no credible evidence could be collected against the present accused/ applicant. Despite, this fact, a charge sheet came to be laid mechanically against the applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant, on the basis of aforesaid submissions, has submitted that the present proceeding is nothing but an abuse of process of this Court and a malicious prosecution too, which deserves to be quashed.
Learned counsel for the applicant has also submitted that due to the absence of present applicant in the Court concerned, the impugned bailable warrant was also issued against him. He has also submitted that the process of non-bailable warrant issued against the applicant is in contravention of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Raghuvansh Dewanchand Bhasin vs. State of Maharashtra reported in (2012) 9 SCC 791 and in Inder Mohan Goswami and another vs. State of Uttaranchal and others reported in (2007) 12 SCC 1.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State has vehemently submitted that the law of quashing has been fairly settled in the celebrated judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 and R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab AIR 1960 SC 866.
His further submission is that in view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ramveer Upadhyay vs. State of U.P. reported in AIR 2022 SC 2044 and Rathish Babu Unnikrishnan vs. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 513, truthfulness or otherwise of the prosecution version or defence version cannot be looked into at this stage. At such an early stage to rush of this Court for quashing itself is an abuse of process of this Court as the trial has not progressed substantially.
Thus, in view of aforesaid, learned A.G.A. has submitted that the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. devoid of merit and deserves to be dismissed.
Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of record including the first information report and the charge sheet laid against the present applicant, this Court is of considered view that in view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bhajan Lal's case (supra), R.P. Kapur's case (supra), Ramveer Upadhyay's case (supra) and Rathish Babu Unnikrishnan's case (supra), no ground for quashing the instant proceeding exists.
Accordingly, the prayer for quashing the proceedings under challenge is refused as this Court does not find any illegality, impropriety and incorrectness in the same. There is no abuse of court's process either.
It is needless to mention here that in the eventuality of filing of any application for cancellation of process issued against the applicant/praying for bail, the learned trial Court shall dispose of such application on its own merits, expeditiously, keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Raghuvansh Dewanchand Bhasin' case (supra) and in Inder Mohan Goswami's case (surpa) in respect of issuance of bailable warrant and in accordance with law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antill vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and others : MANU/SC/1024/2021 by keeping the order of issuing bailable warrant against the present applicant in abeyance for a period of three weeks from today.
It is made clear that in case the present applicant fails to avail the benefit as aforesaid, the same shall stand automatically cease to exist without any further reference to this Court.
With the aforesaid observations, the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 13.4.2023
A.Dewal
